Under the universal basic income proposal, citizens could choose
two years out of 10 to take the £5,000 payment, which would be
funded either by a wealth tax, the creation of a sovereign wealth
fund or a levy on corporate assets.

Such a payment would have a variety of social and economic
benefits, the RSA said.

"A low-skilled worker might reduce their working hours to attain
skills enabling career progression. The fund could provide the
impetus to turn an entrepreneurial idea into a reality. It could
be the support that enables a carer to be there for a loved one
without the need to account for one's caring to the state," the
RSA said.

The cost of the fund would be approximately £14.5 billion per
annum over 13 years and benefit up to 70% of the entire
population of the UK. The RSA compares the cost to that of the
government's pension protections, which cost more than £6 billion
a year, but only benefit a fifth of the population. The payments
would not be means tested, the RSA said.

Academics and politicians have debated whether countries need to
implement universal basic income policies to cope with the
effects of job automation and changing demographics. Similar
schemes are being trialled in Scotland, Finland, Canada, and
several other nations.

Anthony Painter, director of the RSA's Action and Research
Centre, said in a BBC
report: "The simple fact is that too many households are
highly vulnerable to a shock in a decade of disruption, with
storm clouds on the horizon if automation, Brexit and an ageing
population are mismanaged.

"Without a real change in our thinking, neither tweaks to the
welfare state nor getting people into work alone, when the link
between hard work and fair pay has broken, will help working
people meet the challenges ahead."